D&D (2024) The new warlock (Packet 7)

[Sir Brennen]

Good thing you can see yourself. Usually. Otherwise, don't use this unless an ally is within 10 feet of you.

I think the point of this one is an ally within the given range at your destination. So you’re using this ability to go to the ally to heal them, not heal them as you misty step away. Changes the strategy a bit.

Your other comments though, pretty much read like “don’t use thunder wave when Allie’s are standing in front of you.” Well, yeah.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

And how, pray tell, does that support major, mid campaign character development that completely changes the character's story arc moving forward? A formerly non-religious character who finds religion and becomes an devout agent of their new god? A warlock who reneges on their pact and begins to chart a new path that has nothing to do with their former patron?

Locking PCs into the class/subclass they chose at the start for the entire campaign doesn't support that kind of story. Allowing at least the option for multiclassing does.

The trouble with this claim is that history shows it is not accurate.

Because in 1E and 2E, this often happened with non-human characters, who couldn't dual-class (which approximately similar to 3E and 5E multiclassing), so plot-wise we had to work around it. Usually DMs just had PCs change class. Maybe lose a level of two because it was AD&D and AD&D was like that. It's not really that difficult.

It's also a Black Swan event in terms of how common it is - it's incredibly rare in actual campaigns. It's more common in fiction, of course.

If you design your game around ultra-corner-case scenarios like this, you're going to end up with a badly designed game, quite frankly.

 

[Scribe]

Nah
D&D lore.

Int magic is "scientific magic". AKA you know 80%+ what you are doing.

Warlocks don't or cant do the science of warlock magic. It's beyond learning. That's why they make pacts. So patrons can unlock the path in and give them powers.

If warlocks were smart (high int) they'd be wizards and have more spells. Warlocks make pacts to get powers they don't fully understand. They magic is powered by force of will like comic book characters and not knowledge or empathy.

So, I am on board with Int being 'Science Magic' aka Artificer/Wizard, no problem. Bard/Sorc as 'personal' magic? Again, sure. Druid/Cleric Wisdom, understanding the divine, in God/Nature? Got it.

Warlocks dont have any say. They are not the source of power. They are not understanding something better, or learning. Its a bargain. Its a deal. Its literally 'borrowed power'.

The caster stat is irrelevant, because they are not the source, they are the conduit, pass through, being given.

 

[OB1]

Multiclassing is the absolute worst design of this game and I wish I could snuff it out of existence so that classes could actually sing.

Agreed. I’m actually getting the feeling that there is going to be a big change to multi passing rules, maybe requiring a feat (Ranger initiate, Barbarian initiate, etc) to take as a prerequisite. I would welcome something like that, but know it would be incredibly controversial.

 

[Cadence]

So, I am on board with Int being 'Science Magic' aka Artificer/Wizard, no problem. Bard/Sorc as 'personal' magic? Again, sure. Druid/Cleric Wisdom, understanding the divine, in God/Nature? Got it.

Warlocks dont have any say. They are not the source of power. They are not understanding something better, or learning. Its a bargain. Its a deal. Its literally 'borrowed power'.

The caster stat is irrelevant, because they are not the source, they are the conduit, pass through, being given.

I can see

• Intelligence [memory] being able to hold the magic the patron fed to you (one based on the patron making up for lack of magical training)
• Wisdom [perception/insight] being able to feel what the patron is trying to send you (one based on syphoning off something else's power)
• Charisma [force of personality] being able to hold on to yourself as your patron shoves stove into you and uses you as a conduit (one based on being a channel for something else)

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The caster stat is irrelevant, because they are not the source, they are the conduit, pass through, being given.

I mean, I'm not opposed to this, but by your own logic that's not necessarily true.

The power of the conduit, the ability to use what is given, the ability to negotiate power, could very easily impact how strong Warlocks are. You could make a case for any of the three stats, or none - you could have just scale of PBx2 or something (yeah that'd be slightly OP, but you get my point). Hell, why stop at the mental stats? You could make a case for CON or STR. DEX is the only one where you'd really be struggling.

Honestly I think 5E made a very serious mistake by making CHA an important stat for a full third of character classes (primary for a quarter), which is not the case with any other stats. Especially as those classes synergize really well together in other ways too. They should probably have made Warlocks INT, or INT or CHA. Imagine the amount of silly multiclass shenanigans that just wouldn't happen if Warlocks were INT!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I’m actually getting the feeling that there is going to be a big change to multi passing rules

I just don't think so mate. Backwards compatibility has been the watchword of 5E, and introducing new multiclassing rules which replace the previous ones isn't compatible with that. Particularly not requiring Feats. It's a mismatch.

As much as I'd love to see a different approach to multiclassing (2E and 4E both had better approaches than 5E by miles), I think that'd require an actual edition-change.

Also if they just got rid of it, which they could do (but aren't, given all the doubling-down on MC requirements etc. in the UAs), they'd need to seriously look at subclasses and possibly introduce a couple of new classes.

 

[Scribe]

I can see

• Intelligence [memory] being able to hold the magic the patron fed to you (one based on the patron making up for lack of magical training)
• Wisdom [perception/insight] being able to feel what the patron is trying to send you (one based on syphoning off something else's power)
• Charisma [force of personality] being able to hold on to yourself as your patron shoves stove into you and uses you as a conduit (one based on being a channel for something else)

This is the thing, most of us have been hand waving or repurposing things for so long, we can just throw out solutions like this easily.

There is no reason that Warlock MUST be Cha only, and I think the added flexibility of letting them be the one to be any 'caster stat' would be of benefit when Cha is already pretty stacked as it is.

 

[Shardstone]

I just don't think so mate. Backwards compatibility has been the watchword of 5E, and introducing new multiclassing rules which replace the previous ones isn't compatible with that. Particularly not requiring Feats. It's a mismatch.

As much as I'd love to see a different approach to multiclassing (2E and 4E both had better approaches than 5E by miles), I think that'd require an actual edition-change.

Also if they just got rid of it, which they could do (but aren't, given all the doubling-down on MC requirements etc. in the UAs), they'd need to seriously look at subclasses and possibly introduce a couple of new classes.

See? Nothing but benefits happens when multiclassing is removed.

 

[Stalker0]

Warlocks dont have any say. They are not the source of power. They are not understanding something better, or learning. Its a bargain. Its a deal. Its literally 'borrowed power'.

The caster stat is irrelevant, because they are not the source, they are the conduit, pass through, being given.

The main issue with that is.....its the exact same thing as the cleric. Technically the cleric doesn't have power either, it comes from what their god is willing to give them.

There isn't technically any difference between a cleric and a warlock powerwise, other than the patrons of warlocks are seen as "fringe elements" whereas the gods are "the mainstream".

So thematically whatever you do to the warlock stat wise should be done with the cleric as well.